BSMQ vs. AUSM
BSMQ (Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF) and AUSM (Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF) are both Municipal Bonds funds. BSMQ is passively managed, while AUSM is actively managed. At a correlation of -0.01, they often move in opposite directions. Both charge a 0.18% expense ratio.
Performance
BSMQ vs. AUSM - Performance Comparison
Loading charts...
Returns By Period
In the year-to-date period, BSMQ achieves a 0.73% return, which is significantly lower than AUSM's 0.98% return.
BSMQ
- 1D
- -0.06%
- 1M
- 0.14%
- YTD
- 0.73%
- 6M
- 1.17%
- 1Y
- 3.08%
- 3Y*
- 2.92%
- 5Y*
- 0.29%
- 10Y*
- —
AUSM
- 1D
- -0.02%
- 1M
- 0.21%
- YTD
- 0.98%
- 6M
- 1.34%
- 1Y
- —
- 3Y*
- —
- 5Y*
- —
- 10Y*
- —
BSMQ vs. AUSM - Yearly Performance Comparison
| 2026 (YTD) | 2025 | |
|---|---|---|
BSMQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF | 0.73% | 1.72% |
AUSM Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF | 0.98% | 1.63% |
Correlation
The correlation between BSMQ and AUSM is -0.01, meaning there is essentially no relationship between their price movements. Each responds to its own set of market drivers, making them strong candidates for combining in a diversified portfolio.
| Correlation | |
|---|---|
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Jul 9, 2025 | -0.01 |
Compare stocks, funds, or ETFs
Search for stocks, ETFs, and funds for a quick comparison or use the comparison tool for more options.
Return for Risk
BSMQ vs. AUSM — Risk / Return Rank
BSMQ
AUSM
BSMQ vs. AUSM - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison
This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF (BSMQ) and Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF (AUSM). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.
| BSMQ | AUSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sharpe ratioReturn per unit of total volatility | — | — | |
| Sortino ratioReturn per unit of downside risk | — | — | |
| Omega ratioGain probability vs. loss probability | 1.48 | — | — |
| Calmar ratioReturn relative to maximum drawdown | 9.43 | — | — |
| Martin ratioReturn relative to average drawdown | 24.69 | — | — |
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month. | |||
Loading charts...
Sharpe Ratios by Period
| BSMQ | AUSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Sharpe Ratio (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 2.32 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period | 0.11 | — | — |
Sharpe Ratio (All Time)Calculated using the full available price history | 0.25 | 3.98 | -3.73 |
Drawdowns
BSMQ vs. AUSM - Drawdown Comparison
The maximum BSMQ drawdown since its inception was -13.18%, which is greater than AUSM's maximum drawdown of -0.42%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for BSMQ and AUSM.
Loading charts...
Drawdown Indicators
| BSMQ | AUSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Max DrawdownLargest peak-to-trough decline | -13.18% | -0.42% | -12.76% |
Max Drawdown (1Y)Largest decline over 1 year | -0.33% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (3Y)Largest decline over 3 years | -2.53% | — | — |
Max Drawdown (5Y)Largest decline over 5 years | -11.50% | — | — |
Current DrawdownCurrent decline from peak | -0.12% | -0.02% | -0.10% |
Average DrawdownAverage peak-to-trough decline | -3.48% | -0.09% | -3.39% |
Ulcer IndexDepth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks | 0.12% | — | — |
Volatility
BSMQ vs. AUSM - Volatility Comparison
Loading charts...
Volatility by Period
| BSMQ | AUSM | Difference | |
|---|---|---|---|
Volatility (1M)Calculated over the trailing 1-month period | 0.39% | — | — |
Volatility (6M)Calculated over the trailing 6-month period | 0.94% | — | — |
Volatility (1Y)Calculated over the trailing 1-year period | 1.33% | 0.73% | +0.60% |
Volatility (5Y)Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized | 2.68% | 0.73% | +1.95% |
Volatility (10Y)Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized | 4.79% | 0.73% | +4.06% |
BSMQ vs. AUSM - Expense Ratio Comparison
Both BSMQ and AUSM have an expense ratio of 0.18%, making them cost-effective options compared to the broader market, where average expense ratios typically range from 0.3% to 0.9%.
Dividends
BSMQ vs. AUSM - Dividend Comparison
BSMQ's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 2.76%, more than AUSM's 2.39% yield.
| Position | TTM | 2025 | 2024 | 2023 | 2022 | 2021 | 2020 | 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
AUSM Allspring Ultra Short Municipal ETF | 2.39% | 1.26% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% | 0.00% |
BSMQ Invesco BulletShares 2026 Municipal Bond ETF | 2.76% | 2.74% | 2.75% | 2.47% | 1.60% | 1.14% | 1.57% | 0.44% |
Frequently Asked Questions
BSMQ and AUSM have a correlation of -0.01, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.
Both ETFs have the same 0.18% expense ratio. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.
BSMQ and AUSM have the same expense ratio: 0.18% per year.
BSMQ has the higher dividend yield at 2.76%, compared with 2.39% for AUSM.
They also come from different issuers: Invesco and Allspring.
Find the right allocation for BSMQ and AUSM
Add both to a portfolio and optimize allocations for your target — whether that's maximizing returns, minimizing drawdowns, or balancing risk across holdings.
Open Portfolio Optimizer